After struggling for decades, competitive gaming finally takes off in the West.

I'm standing on the edge of a shoulder-to-shoulder crowd—the kind of crowd where you have to apologize to seven people just to move a few feet—frantically snapping pictures, because I've got the distinct feeling that what I'm looking at is one of the stories of the year in video gaming.

It's a video game tournament, but it looks more like a rock concert, complete with a huge stage up front, tons of lighting equipment overhead, and a large merchandise booth off to the side. As the tournament reaches the finals, the crowd continues to flow in until every seat, aisle and empty corner of the two linked ballrooms of the Seattle Convention Center is filled with a throng comprising thousands and thousands of people. Even when the room seems completely full, the people don't stop coming, and the hallways outside of the ballroom begin to clog as fans continue streaming up from the lower floors of the Penny Arcade Expo.

They're all here to watch professional gaming teams battle it out in the North American regional finals in League of Legends, a PC action-strategy game that has exploded in the competitive video gaming scene over the past year. The tournament's winning team will take home $40,000 and a trip to the World Championship in October, where the victor will net $2 million and international fame.

A tipping point

Starcraft II competitions are popular enough to be considered the national pastime in South Korea, but for most of the last two decades the idea of gaming as a popular spectator competition in the West has been little more than the butt of jokes. In the last year or so, though, eSports has undergone a sudden exponential growth. The Major League Gaming Spring Championship in June (which featured tournaments in four high-profile games like Starcraft II and Mortal Kombat) attracted 4.7 million online viewers over three days in June, peaking at 437,000 concurrent viewers. That's substantially more than all of their 2011 events combined. Over 2.2 million viewers tuned in to Ustream internet broadcast of the 2011 EVO fighting game championships from a packed ballroom in Las Vegas.

These competitions aren't just popular with loners sitting and watching at their computers, but also with crowds of people that gather to watch the events live. After the packed crowds at the PAX Regionals in Seattle, last week League of Legends officially sold out its second annual World Championship in Los Angeles' USC Basketball Arena (which has a seating capacity of 10,000, though it's unclear if all those seats are being used for the tournament). A three-day playoff series at a smaller venue is also sold out about a month in advance.

After decades of struggle, eSports are finally starting to attract significant attention in North America. The raw numbers might not compare well with well-established spectators sports like football and basketball, but that might be the wrong comparison to make. After all, you don't need to be Lebron James to get a start in the NBA, you just need to be better than the low-ranking players. And eSports certainly show more fan excitement and growth potential than the least popular sports that currently get television coverage, such as late night poker or lacrosse. In many cases spectator gaming even rivals other up-and-coming sports leagues like Major League Soccer in terms of viewership.

Plus, these new digital spectator sports don't really need to compete head-to-head with other established sports, because they've completely bypassed television distribution. Online streams let these eSports hunt down the key gamer demographic in their natural habitats—forums, social media, and video game websites— without the need for television exposure. The ability to offer free eSports programming to any curious gamer with a broadband connection has helped the concept spread virally, and paid HD subscriptions have become a much-needed revenue source as well.

A generational shift

Up until about 2011, eSports showed persistent but slow growth that bore the markings of a snail-like generational shift. Before eSports could become the force that it is evolving into today, it first needed a generation of potential viewers that grew up comfortable with the idea of watching digital competition in basements and rec rooms from a young age. Those lifelong gamers then needed to grow up, get jobs, and acquire disposable income for advertisers to chase after, a phenomenon that is finally starting to happen on a large enough scale to support a spectator sport.

In 2012, that slow-growing community support has finally gotten large enough to translate into significant advertising support from major brands. Dr. Pepper, Doritos, Red Bull, Bic razors, and all manner of gaming companies are turning out for the chance to advertise to a flock of eSports watchers in the key 18-30 year old male demographic.

Enlarge/ The view from the standing room in the back wasn't great, but the thrill of being in the crowd was electric.

The current limiting factor for the eSports movement is not the fact that it hasn't been fully accepted by mainstream culture, but that it hasn't even been fully accepted by the entire video game industry. The scene still excludes almost all of console gaming (save for the relatively niche fighting game genre), and scant few publishers have committed appreciable funding toward developing their competitive communities.

But this is starting to change. Activision, for instance, recently unveiled a spectator toolset for one of the biggest games in the world, Call of Duty: Black Ops 2, which will allow shoutcasters access to advanced camera and streaming tools to bring matches to viewers much more comprehensively (Shooters in particular have struggled to gain spectator appeal outside a hardcore niche because of the complexity of relaying action that takes place from so many perspective). The upcoming MMO/shooter Firefall and Valve's League of Legends competitor Dota 2 are adding similar eSports-friendly tools. Halo 4 will also be playable to the public at a November Major League Gaming event just prior to its launch, showing how important Microsoft considers the audience of live eSports spectators.

If Microsoft and Sony include integrated support for eSports streaming services like Twitch.tv in their upcoming consoles then we could very well be on the verge of an even larger eSports boom.

The crowd

As I'm standing in the crowd at the PAX League of Legends finals, a player on Team SoloMid (the eventual champions) pulls off a surprise kill and the crowd goes wild in raucous applause and whoops. It's at that moment that I realize the full appeal of eSports, just like traditional sports, comes through best with a live crowd. It doesn't really matter whether the game that's being played is soccer or Starcraft, there's a human element of camaraderie that comes from sharing a moment of excitement with thousands of other individuals.

And that's the true hope for the future of competitive video games. Traditional sports have reigned in North America for a hundred years, but as I stand watching this crowd cheer their hearts out, I wonder what the sporting world will look like in the future. Right now, eSports' most populous demographic is an incredibly young 18-24 year old male. Meanwhile, new people are being born into a world where watching eSports is increasingly normal. What might the sporting world look like in 25 years when that a significant percent of the population has grown up with the idea of popular competitive gaming? In 100 years? What if game designers can create entirely new games that are built from the ground up to be thrilling for spectators?

We don't yet know the answers to these questions, but it's going to be incredibly exciting to watch them unfold. It seems possible now that the video game revolution that dawned in the '70s could continue to shape our spectator-sports-crazy culture for decades to come.

I don't mind the concept of televised, popular game tournaments. Honestly, it gives those people who really excel a chance to show off their skills, and your average spectator can then give it a try in their own games. I mean, I participated in a (small, unofficial) Guitar Hero tourny at PAX East a few years ago, and it was a ton of fun, and I would do it again. I would also watch a tournament like that and also have a great time.

What I dislike is the term "eSports." It just rubs me the wrong way. There's nothing athletic about it, so the use of the word Sports is wrong.

We've had competitive, televised Poker for ages. And Chess tournaments (not so televised). And a host of other interesting, compelling competitions to watch, root for, and aspire to that aren't sports. So why does Pro DOTA get called a sport?

eSports continue to be a niche thing although more popular within its niche than before. I don't see it gaining mainstream appeal anytime soon.

That's pretty much what I was going to say. 400,000 concurrent viewers may be unprecedented, but compared to well over 300 million people, it's a rounding error.

When gaming starts pulling numbers approaching a football match (of either kind), then we can talk. More importantly, when gaming starts getting popular names, teams, and so forth (and yes, I know about Evil Geniuses, Broken Tier, and so forth), then we can talk about them becoming mainstream.

This article presumes way too much about this stuff. MLG is a weekend thing, nothing more. It's not a league with standings that you follow week-to-week. It's just an event that rolls around every now and then.

And the fact that PAX was crowded for an eSports event should not be surprising. Then again, I imagine Omegathon was packed too, and that's about as far from real competitive gaming as it gets.

eSports continue to be a niche thing although more popular within its niche than before. I don't see it gaining mainstream appeal anytime soon.

That's pretty much what I was going to say. 400,000 concurrent viewers may be unprecedented, but compared to well over 300 million people, it's a rounding error.

Wow guys, it's almost like the author wouldn't ignore such an obvious point and actually address it in the article! Oh wait, he did:

Quote:

The raw numbers might not compare well with well-established spectators sports like football and basketball, but that might be the wrong comparison to make. After all, you don't need to be Lebron James to get a start in the NBA, you just need to be better than the low-ranking players. And eSports certainly show more fan excitement and growth potential than the least popular sports that currently get television coverage, such as late night poker or lacrosse. In many cases spectator gaming even rivals other up-and-coming sports leagues like Major League Soccer in terms of viewership.

Also Alfonse super cool reply with your suggestion that the entire population of America are concurrent viewers of anything. Oh you.

eSports continue to be a niche thing although more popular within its niche than before. I don't see it gaining mainstream appeal anytime soon.

That's pretty much what I was going to say. 400,000 concurrent viewers may be unprecedented, but compared to well over 300 million people, it's a rounding error.

When gaming starts pulling numbers approaching a football match (of either kind), then we can talk.

I agree, news outlets should begin reporting on eSports when they have regularly have millions of viewers for regular season matches, and not one second before! I demand that Ars ignore any up-and-coming trends that do not yet directly impact Joe Everyman!

KT421 wrote:

I don't mind the concept of televised, popular game tournaments.

Oh man, I'm glad we got your permission! Thanks man!

Quote:

What I dislike is the term "eSports." It just rubs me the wrong way. There's nothing athletic about it, so the use of the word Sports is wrong.

That's why it's eSports, and not just regular "sports". The 'e' is for 'electronic'.

Quote:

We've had competitive, televised Poker for ages. And Chess tournaments (not so televised). And a host of other interesting, compelling competitions to watch, root for, and aspire to that aren't sports. So why does Pro DOTA get called a sport?

Because people collective rolled with that name to promote wider acceptance? Seems pretty obvious to me.

What I dislike is the term "eSports." It just rubs me the wrong way. There's nothing athletic about it, so the use of the word Sports is wrong.

We've had competitive, televised Poker for ages. And Chess tournaments (not so televised). And a host of other interesting, compelling competitions to watch, root for, and aspire to that aren't sports. So why does Pro DOTA get called a sport?

Because your definition of sport is not universal. According to some definitions, a sport doesn't have to include extensive athletic elements. Why the hell would curling, shooting, car racing or chess be considered sports and dota wouldn't ?

Glad to see Ars throwing some coverage out to eSports, even if I don't particularly care for that moniker.

I watched most of the matches from DotA 2's "The International 2" and had an absolute blast doing so. It's entertaining because you're watching people of obviously higher skill playing games that you yourself play. I picked up quite a few tricks from watching the pros play (even if I fail to put them into good use!).

One of the issues with console eSports that can make it awkward is games being multi-platform without cross-platform multiplayer. There's a big scene for SC2 (and I can only assume a similar one for LoL and DOTA2) with low- and mid-tier tournaments and leagues that increase interest in the higher-level competitions, and naturally they all take place entirely online. If you're trying to do this with the latest Call of Duty, how will you handle 360 players and PS3 players? They can't play with each other online, and if you just choose one, the other demographic will be pissed.

PC games generally do not have this problem, as they're either Windows-only, or Windows/Mac but with cross-platform multiplayer. And with fighting games, they're so latency-sensitive that online play is pretty much a permanent sideshow to live competitions.

I think that video games as a spectator event is heavily challenged by the pace of change that comes with anything computer related. The rules of hockey or football don't change much even over spans of decades. Whereas what game is hot changes with each generation of new releases, and is subject to platform updates as well.

I've been a gamer since Pong, and things sure have come a long way in terms of general public acceptance, but it'll be a while yet I think before I'd advise a youngster to pursue a career in gaming.

What I dislike is the term "eSports." It just rubs me the wrong way. There's nothing athletic about it, so the use of the word Sports is wrong. ...why does Pro DOTA get called a sport?

Because nerds v. jocks?

Who cares? Terminology often has questionable etymology.

Alfonse wrote:

When gaming starts pulling numbers approaching a football match (of either kind), then we can talk.

Hmm. The broadcast-oriented nature of football, and live sports in general, coupled with their use as discursive social lubricants pushes toward simultaneous viewing. There's little value in watching Monday night's football game tonight, because you won't really be able to talk to anyone about it - there was another game last night, and the Sunday slate of games are just two days away. (Plus the regular refs are back, etc etc.)

"eSports," in contrast, have a "long tail" of viewership. I'd wager that the majority of people who have seen Daigo's EVO exploits saw them on YouTube, not at the tournament. For material highly suited to on-going individual viewership, 400,000 concurrent live viewers is a Big Deal™.

Or, put it this way: "When porn starts pulling numbers approaching a football match, then we can talk." Right? Pretty obvious how absurd that is, isn't it?

Glad to see Ars throwing some coverage out to eSports, even if I don't particularly care for that moniker.

I watched most of the matches from DotA 2's "The International 2" and had an absolute blast doing so. It's entertaining because you're watching people of obviously higher skill playing games that you yourself play. I picked up quite a few tricks from watching the pros play (even if I fail to put them into good use!).

Glad you liked it. I hate the term eSports too, but I'm thankful we're not stuck with caveman words like "Basket-ball" and "Foot-ball." The latter of which includes neither feet, nor balls. Though I guess "Catch-the-Ellipsoid" doesn't have the same ring to it.

Apparently 200-300 actions per minute isn't athletic enough to qualify for the glorious title of "sport". I tease, but I remember struggling with the term several years ago. The thing is, I couldn't come up with a better one. And you know what... some day video gaming WILL be athletic. Our interfaces just aren't that good yet.

If you think 400,000 concurrent viewers is insignificant, you might consider that a couple years ago it was common to get around 15,000. We previously had problems with the technology to support more. 15,000 would easily saturate some streams relatively not long ago. Now it's getting popular quite rapidly as more people try it. Most people brush it off as this niche geeky thing until they just watch a tournament. They'll at least get it and possibly be hooked, just like any sport. It's very entertaining with high profile players and teams, and unbounded by the limitations of reality. That means the games can be much more entertaining, because they can be designed that way more easily.

I'm just sad that MLG of all tournaments gets so much of the attention.

I think that video games as a spectator event is heavily challenged by the pace of change that comes with anything computer related. The rules of hockey or football don't change much even over spans of decades. Whereas what game is hot changes with each generation of new releases, and is subject to platform updates as well.

I've been a gamer since Pong, and things sure have come a long way in terms of general public acceptance, but it'll be a while yet I think before I'd advise a youngster to pursue a career in gaming.

That's very true, and it's a good point. Though I'd counter by noting that most popular eSports today are iterations on a pretty specific rule set that has endured for decades already.

StarCraft 2 for instance has roots in SC1 and has similarities to the old competitive Warcraft games. So its base ruleset is 20 years old and shows no signs of going away. Similarly anybody who knows how a MOBA title works will be able to understand any game in the genre at a basic level, whether its League of Legends or Dota 2. The same goes for fighting games and shooters based on the deathmatch/capture the flag model.

Mass education is a big issue though, and eSports will face major hurdles in the future in teaching their games to enough new people.

400,000 concurrent viewers may be unprecedented, but compared to well over 300 million people, it's a rounding error.

When gaming starts pulling numbers approaching a football match (of either kind), then we can talk.

400k concurrent viewers is considerably more than the 125k who watched last Thursday's MLS game on ESPN2

Just shows that Northern Americans are weird, when it comes to their tastes in sports.

On the other hand MLS is no soccer. I always get sad when I watch a game.

Regarding gaming? Meh. Might grow a bit but somehow I do not see it escaping its niche. Perhaps for the best. Sports that are actually forcing you to run around being considered cooler than sitting in front of a computer may not be such a bad thing for the health of the nation.

The "eSports" community is growing at a pretty quick rate (though I really loathe the name..)

I got involved in a livestreaming gaming channel on Livestream about five years ago based on a thread someone linked me on 4chan talking about the concept. It was pretty small at the time, with maybe about 50 people doing it regularly.

Many didn't last past the first month or two. Some did, though, and as the years blew by, I've seen the number of other "non-professional broadcast" game streams shoot through the ceiling-- enough for the Justin.TV guys to split off the gaming channels to their own site, Twitch.TV.

It's picked up enough that CBS has picked up the advertising for at least two game streaming sites that I'm aware of, too. Scoff if you guys really want, but it's bigger than you think and continuing to grow at a pace that is frankly astonishing.

I think the eSports scene will always be anemic because of the constant changing of games. Will non-players ever be interested in watching high-level play of games they don't play? As a casual League of Legends player, I don't even enjoy watching the high-level matches! I can't imagine a time where my wife or a co-worker would be interested either.

I wish them the best, but it's an uphill battle for the eSports scene to attract anyone outside of a game's player base.

Just shows that Northern Americans are weird, when it comes to their tastes in sports.

On the other hand MLS is no soccer. I always get sad when I watch a game.

That's some nice condescension you have there.

So MLS is not at the level of European or South American professional soccer, therefore it's not soccer? I'm pretty sure all the soccer I played growing up was actual soccer, and we were much, much worse than any MLS team.

I think the eSports scene will always be anemic because of the constant changing of games. Will non-players ever be interested in watching high-level play of games they don't play? As a casual League of Legends player, I don't even enjoy watching the high-level matches! I can't imagine a time where my wife or a co-worker would be interested either.

I wish them the best, but it's an uphill battle for the eSports scene to attract anyone outside of a game's player base.

I was just going to post the same thing, but probably with a more optimistic outlook. It's a challenge for them, but not one that can't be overcome. Starcraft has been a popular game for a long time. Long enough for people to learn how it works (even if they don't play much) and enjoy watching a match. But yes, the temptation to constantly move to new games will be there and is a challenge for them.

Just shows that Northern Americans are weird, when it comes to their tastes in sports.

On the other hand MLS is no soccer. I always get sad when I watch a game.

That's some nice condescension you have there.

So MLS is not at the level of European or South American professional soccer, therefore it's not soccer? I'm pretty sure all the soccer I played growing up was actual soccer, and we were much, much worse than any MLS team.

Of course they are better soccer players than I for example could ever be. But seriously it just is not very good. If you play on the level of a English or German regional league you do not need to wonder when you get Regionleague viewer numbers.

Its similar to Icehockey (with the exception of tschecks) or football in Europe. Really good teams are just more fun to watch.

As much fun as I have playing LoL, I find Dota 2 much more exciting to watch. It is a bit odd, to play one and watch the other, but Dota 2 has such varied characters and it is amazing to see how professionals use them that it makes matches more "different" from each other. Of course some strategies win more often than others, but the game as a whole is much less rigid (at the professional level).

In LoL, you ALWAYS* have a support and carry together in lane. In Dota? Sometimes you have the carry in a solo lane, sometimes in a tri, you have characters that can clone abilities of their opponents, crushing ultimates, teleporting teammates across the map, team invisibilities, neutral monster conversions, etc etc.

That said, I just can't play at that level. I can manage my character okay, but I fall apart trying to handle minions.

I really don't understand the dislike for the term eSports. I mean, nobody hates on the term e-mail even though there isn't a guy physically running the letters around. Its a great terminology that even upon first inspection gives you a good idea of what the whole concept is about.

That being said, I'm pretty excited for the future of eSports. I've watched it really start to take off with the releases of SC2 and LoL. I'm too old and eSports too young for me to have a career in it (not as player but I'd love more the production end), but maybe my kids will have the opportunity.

As much fun as I have playing LoL, I find Dota 2 much more exciting to watch.

DOTA2 still has to overcome an insufferable community (which LOL is also guilty of) and the GIGANTIC barriers of entry to the game and MOBA genre.

I agree DOTA is more exciting to watch, but they have to find a way to tame the existing community and a way to gradually introduce new players to the game. As a current DOTA2 beta player, I've tried to get several of my friends interested and they have all passed on the game. They're extremely put off by the players and their eyes gloss over when presented with the enormous breadth of knowledge (champions/items/strategies) required to even be competitive in public games.

I've been to 6 or 7 QuakeCons in the past, and I never did get into watching any of the matches. The only time I'd even bother to stop was the big final (either a 1v1 or teams against each other). And even then it only captivated me because I knew the game well, so I knew *why* these guys (and gal) were so good. I can't imagine the matches being interesting to anyone, let alone non-gamers. But I can't stand to watch any sports either, so I guess in that way they're the same for me?

Also:

Quote:

What if game designers can create entirely new games that are built from the ground up to be thrilling for spectators?

I've been a gamer for decades (3 of them) and I just can't see the attraction of watching somebody else play a game I could be playing myself.

To each, their own, but wow, don't get this at all.

That's how I feel about watching "real" sports. I used to play organized sports, but I don't anymore (nothing wrong with doing that though). As a result I don't get much satisfaction watching others play a game that I don't play. However, I do enjoy watching high level players (with commentary) play SC2 because it has taught me so much about how to be a good player. It's enjoyable to watch because you can relate to it an apply it to your own gaming strategies. If I still played "real" sports I'd feel the same way about watching that sport played by professionals.

Regarding gaming? Meh. Might grow a bit but somehow I do not see it escaping its niche. Perhaps for the best. Sports that are actually forcing you to run around being considered cooler than sitting in front of a computer may not be such a bad thing for the health of the nation.

Watching sports forces no one to run around.

swx2 wrote:

wjousts wrote:

I've been a gamer for decades (3 of them) and I just can't see the attraction of watching somebody else play a game I could be playing myself.

To each, their own, but wow, don't get this at all.

Can't this also be said of hockey/basketball/soccer/football/baseball? Or almost ANY of the olympic events?

Yes, it certainly can. Watching a screen is watching a screen. Additionally:

wjousts wrote:

I've been a gamer for decades (3 of them) and I just can't see the attraction of watching somebody else play a game I could be playing myself.

You must not be very competitive then. It's very hard to get good without doing any learning from people who are better, particularly if you're solo. Knowing whatever is being watched just adds another layer of enjoyment, and again, this is not some videogame thing, it's the same for everything. I know a couple of professional cyclists, good enough to get some high finishes in national races. They really like watching the Tour de France though, even though they ride every day. They don't like it less because they ride, but more, because they can appreciate exactly what the riders are going through and all the nuances of strategy and mechanics involved. They get way more out of it then I do. I saw the same thing in music. I am not a musician, but I've gone to some amazing concerts with friends who are. Both of us can appreciate the music, but they'll be discussing how incredible the hand movements were or how certain notes were pulled off or something, they get it on an entirely different level from me.

So yeah, I guess YMMV, but in my experience participating in an activity doesn't necessarily mean not being interested in others doing so.

I don't see any personal appeal, but watching video games is still quite a few steps up from watching golf or poker in my opinion. So, why not?

I will put in one more vote against the term eSports. I don't consider these sports any more than I consider poker or chess to be sports. That's not a value judgment, I just consider "sports" to be athletic and sticking an e on the front doesn't change that.

I can't get into esports because I can't get into alot of the esports titles and watching would be boring. Why should I watch someone else play a game I despise like League of Legends or quickly got bored of like SC2. In my experience playing games that are focused on esports is that the community of those games tends to be very unfriendly and unsportsmanlike.

I don't think metrics like actions per minute measure real skill other than who can click the fastest, and that games don't have the same element of unpredictability that physical sports does. Also a lack of unique talent as anyone can study the game or google what the esport pro do and copy it exactly, something that can't be done in physical sports.

While esports may be gaining in popularity I think it faces some very difficult challanges in becoming a mainstream success instead of a niche.

I never did "get" LOL / DOTA2. Tried playing a couple matches of LOL, got completely trounced. Tried spectating a match in DOTA2 beta, could not figure out what the strategy was supposed to be.

Then again, I always sucked at multiplayer Starcraft.

DOTA and LOL type games have huge learning curves. It takes hours and hours and hours just to understand what each hero's abilities are, and how they can be used together, or what each of the items that you can buy will do... playing just a "couple of games" won't get you very far... which i guess is a problem in and of itself, as the general goal of soccer/football/basketball is immediately apparent from just watching for a few seconds, which might make these already established games more approachable (from a playing prospective, not necessarily watching) than DOTA and LOL